Post Match Mellon Head had a slightly different tone this week, maybe a case of the win allowing him to be a bit more honest or a case of nonexcuses left, seemed to acknowledge that this group isn't good enough as it stands and that we need more flare. An acknowledgment that it's not just about silky skills and as much about digging in.

In respects of Tollit, acknowledging we lack flare, pace and the ability to go past players and the fact he's not fit do you start Tollit Wednesday. Personally I thick not, at this stage I feel he may offer something more coming on from the bench with 25-30 to go, he'll be fresh defenders will be starting to flag, he can mix it up and gives him the best chance to run riot.

there must be a huge potential to play Tollitt, but I wouldn't start him on Wednesday, he needs to come back gradually probably used for 20 minutes at the end of the next few games until he can build back up match fitness.

I thought when I saw the title of this thread, it was about which media organisation Micky Mellon should speak to first after matches

Mellon's preferred rota for the cattle call.

Tranmere TV
Wirral News
Wirral Globe
Sky
Liverpool Echo
BT Sport.

Tollit was alleged to be fully fit by Mellon, but I suspect he'll start and only get 70-75 minutes, with the Barnsley lad Dylan getting the remainder of the pitch time that Tollit won't play, unless Mellon plans to dovetail them both into the team at the same time, for a reasonable length of time.

Then I ate his Liver.......... with some baked beans and a can of coke.

HiggosbootsPost Match Mellon Head had a slightly different tone this week, maybe a case of the win allowing him to be a bit more honest or a case of nonexcuses left, seemed to acknowledge that this group isn't good enough as it stands and that we need more flare. An acknowledgment that it's not just about silky skills and as much about digging in.
In respects of Tollit, acknowledging we lack flare, pace and the ability to go past players and the fact he's not fit do you start Tollit Wednesday. Personally I thick not, at this stage I feel he may offer something more coming on from the bench with 25-30 to go, he'll be fresh defenders will be starting to flag, he can mix it up and gives him the best chance to run riot.

HiggosbootsPost Match Mellon Head had a slightly different tone this week, maybe a case of the win allowing him to be a bit more honest or a case of nonexcuses left, seemed to acknowledge that this group isn't good enough as it stands and that we need more flare. An acknowledgment that it's not just about silky skills and as much about digging in.
In respects of Tollit, acknowledging we lack flare, pace and the ability to go past players and the fact he's not fit do you start Tollit Wednesday. Personally I thick not, at this stage I feel he may offer something more coming on from the bench with 25-30 to go, he'll be fresh defenders will be starting to flag, he can mix it up and gives him the best chance to run riot.

Also someone replying to their own posts that they've quoted. There can't be many sadder sights than that, with the possible exception of an abandoned wet dog by the roadside and people liking their own stuff on social media.

Then I ate his Liver.......... with some baked beans and a can of coke.

Matt34Also someone replying to their own posts that they've quoted. There can't be many sadder sights than that, with the possible exception of an abandoned wet dog by the roadside and people liking their own stuff on social media.

Yes because the manger made yet another poor decision, when have you ever heard of a player being out 8 months and starting from the off especially in @#$%& wet weather. It's not like he's even been playing reserve football. As for wet dogs, that's up their with people who think Premier League players should be on our maybe list and writing on backs of stamps.

HiggosbootsYes because the manger made yet another poor decision, when have you ever heard of a player being out 8 months and starting from the off especially in @#$%& wet weather. It's not like he's even been playing reserve football. As for wet dogs, that's up their with people who think Premier League players should be on our maybe list and writing on backs of stamps.

I don’t doubt for a second Tollitt would of started if not given the nod by the club doctor and physio first ... this isn’t pub football.

HiggosbootsYes because the manger made yet another poor decision, when have you ever heard of a player being out 8 months and starting from the off especially in @#$%& wet weather

However some people were hanging their hat on him being a potential linchpin of some turnaround in form and by many accounts he was spot on in terms of physical ability to handle a start, because if the physio says yes he's good to go, why is it Mellon making the poor decision, when he'd be just going by what people with more medical knowledge than him said?

You blaming Mellon for acting on a physio's say-so, is like the public blaming Michael Fish 30 years ago for predicting a non-existent hurricane, when he was just the spokesperson for other peoples stats and data.

Also some people including some on here, were clamouring for him to start and had he been benched and shock horror, not even used, do you think Mellon would have garnered 0% flak for his decision making.

There is the old saying you can't please all the people all of the time, but Mellon is fighting a losing battle, because anything he does regardless of what it is, gets a certain percentage of people on his back, when in the last 7-10 days it could be argued that at the very least, he shouldn't be getting any grief for things that have happened during that time period, only for things happening prior to that time period.

Then I ate his Liver.......... with some baked beans and a can of coke.

Said on his twitter feed last night the "little knock" didn't seem to bad, must admit I whined a little when that lad clipped his foot for the free kick after the injury he's had it's not what you want. Hopefully not out that long, just can not see why he started him, not having the may as well get 30 minutes at the beginning as the end, not really all players are fresh in the first 30 and in game plan mode, they have been told to be right at him, and Ultimatley if you bring him in it's a managers decision as opposed last nights enforced change.

Very poor decision to play him from the start .and not the weather for it .20 minutes against Chester would have made more sense and slowly built the time he played up .i really wonder about Mellon sometimes .once the Barnsley lad leaves we will be back to square one .i don't get this on loan for a month thing ,by the time they have gelled with the team then they leave .

The knee is such a delicate joint. Having had an ACL reconstruction myself this is really bad news. I took a big hit playing footy and while the ACL remained fine (it takes a lot of force to break a new ACL as in theory it is 4 times stronger) the secondary damage to the other soft tissues has caused other issues.

Hindsight is such a wonderful thing. Not once, either before the game or while it was in progress, did I hear anyone say that Ben should not have played. Speaking to people prior to kick off and all over social media, everyone was saying they were delighted he was back. He then gets injured, nothing to to do with his previous cruciate injury, and so many are now saying he should not have started, MM has panicked, wrong pitch etc etc etc.

Eric01 TranmereWhy is it wrong to play him this week when all the medical advice available says he's fit and ready? The weather was the weather, we cannot only play when it's nice and sunny.

That's true we can't always play when it's sunny, but when you have a player coming back after a long layoff on a very wet night and getting worse as the night drew on with the pitch getting heavier even the local forecast predicated long periods of heavy rain.

It was not the right conditions for a come back more like Mellon having a panic on just to change things, if we were playing well and sitting in the top four Tollitt may not have played. Should have played the new lad from the start only because of that weather.

Well said Belmont of course we all wanted him back ,but to throw him in the deep end after such a long lay off was not the right choice 20 mins Wednesday and Against Chester then assessed him again not many players coming back from a long lay off get to start a full game ,to me that's not looking out for the lad ,more like an act of desperation

Aldo'smuzzyAs I understand it, this injury has nothing to do with his old injury and nothing to do with the conditions. He said he took a knock. Could happen any time. What's Mellon going to be blamed for next?

For playing Tollitt on Wednesday night,if the the weather had been dry and the pitch not so heavy with water due to the rain Tottitt may have moved quicker and got out of the way of the knock.😀

FiftyyearsaroverWell said Belmont of course we all wanted him back ,but to throw him in the deep end after such a long lay off was not the right choice 20 mins Wednesday and Against Chester then assessed him again not many players coming back from a long lay off get to start a full game ,to me that's not looking out for the lad ,more like an act of desperation

Yardleys CatHindsight is such a wonderful thing. Not once, either before the game or while it was in progress, did I hear anyone say that Ben should not have played. Speaking to people prior to kick off and all over social media, everyone was saying they were delighted he was back. He then gets injured, nothing to to do with his previous cruciate injury, and so many are now saying he should not have started, MM has panicked, wrong pitch etc etc etc.
It really seems some people are only happy when criticising.

You don't need to rely on hindsight when you have foresight, as per my earlier comments he shouldn't play give him 25 minutes. It is not a repeat of the injury but an injury sustained through desperation and lack of match fitness. It's fine belting up and down solar campus, running through cones and playing 2 touch with your mates. I can tell you from personal experience NOTHING can replicate competition and the stresses and strains this puts on you. ACL can be career ending and it's for all these reasons, the repair maybe stronger but it's the collateral damage you can legislate for. Coming on for the last 20 if the game allows means everyone else is tired and he would be far fresher to compete comparatively. We all know Davies team talk would have been centred on BT once he saw the sheet, get into him, kick him welcome him back to the NL.

Yardleys CatHindsight is such a wonderful thing. Not once, either before the game or while it was in progress, did I hear anyone say that Ben should not have played. Speaking to people prior to kick off and all over social media, everyone was saying they were delighted he was back. He then gets injured, nothing to to do with his previous cruciate injury, and so many are now saying he should not have started, MM has panicked, wrong pitch etc etc etc.
It really seems some people are only happy when criticising.

You don't need to rely on hindsight when you have foresight, as per my earlier comments he shouldn't play give him 25 minutes. It is not a repeat of the injury but an injury sustained through desperation and lack of match fitness. It's fine belting up and down solar campus, running through cones and playing 2 touch with your mates. I can tell you from personal experience NOTHING can replicate competition and the stresses and strains this puts on you. ACL can be career ending and it's for all these reasons, the repair maybe stronger but it's the collateral damage you can legislate for. Coming on for the last 20 if the game allows means everyone else is tired and he would be far fresher to compete comparatively. We all know Davies team talk would have been centred on BT once he saw the sheet, get into him, kick him welcome him back to the NL.

Sorry if I missed it but, prior to kick off, where and when did you post/comment that Ben should not have started. I would also think that prior to selection MM would have sought the views of the club doctor, physio, possibly the surgeon and BT himself. Unless of course you know otherwise. The injury he sustained on Wednesday could have happened anytime and tackles are more likely to be mis timed in the last twenty minutes when the pitch is heavier and defenders tired.

Yardleys CatHindsight is such a wonderful thing. Not once, either before the game or while it was in progress, did I hear anyone say that Ben should not have played. Speaking to people prior to kick off and all over social media, everyone was saying they were delighted he was back. He then gets injured, nothing to to do with his previous cruciate injury, and so many are now saying he should not have started, MM has panicked, wrong pitch etc etc etc.
It really seems some people are only happy when criticising.

You don't need to rely on hindsight when you have foresight, as per my earlier comments he shouldn't play give him 25 minutes. It is not a repeat of the injury but an injury sustained through desperation and lack of match fitness. It's fine belting up and down solar campus, running through cones and playing 2 touch with your mates. I can tell you from personal experience NOTHING can replicate competition and the stresses and strains this puts on you. ACL can be career ending and it's for all these reasons, the repair maybe stronger but it's the collateral damage you can legislate for. Coming on for the last 20 if the game allows means everyone else is tired and he would be far fresher to compete comparatively. We all know Davies team talk would have been centred on BT once he saw the sheet, get into him, kick him welcome him back to the NL.

Sorry if I missed it but, prior to kick off, where and when did you post/comment that Ben should not have started. I would also think that prior to selection MM would have sought the views of the club doctor, physio, possibly the surgeon and BT himself. Unless of course you know otherwise. The injury he sustained on Wednesday could have happened anytime and tackles are more likely to be mis timed in the last twenty minutes when the pitch is heavier and defenders tired.

Right at the top of this thread when I said personally I wouldn't start him! An it wouldn't be like a football club to utilise a player who's not fit would it? The body is more susceptible to "those unrelated" injuries when not fit.

Yardleys CatHindsight is such a wonderful thing. Not once, either before the game or while it was in progress, did I hear anyone say that Ben should not have played. Speaking to people prior to kick off and all over social media, everyone was saying they were delighted he was back. He then gets injured, nothing to to do with his previous cruciate injury, and so many are now saying he should not have started, MM has panicked, wrong pitch etc etc etc.
It really seems some people are only happy when criticising.

You don't need to rely on hindsight when you have foresight, as per my earlier comments he shouldn't play give him 25 minutes. It is not a repeat of the injury but an injury sustained through desperation and lack of match fitness. It's fine belting up and down solar campus, running through cones and playing 2 touch with your mates. I can tell you from personal experience NOTHING can replicate competition and the stresses and strains this puts on you. ACL can be career ending and it's for all these reasons, the repair maybe stronger but it's the collateral damage you can legislate for. Coming on for the last 20 if the game allows means everyone else is tired and he would be far fresher to compete comparatively. We all know Davies team talk would have been centred on BT once he saw the sheet, get into him, kick him welcome him back to the NL.

Sorry if I missed it but, prior to kick off, where and when did you post/comment that Ben should not have started. I would also think that prior to selection MM would have sought the views of the club doctor, physio, possibly the surgeon and BT himself. Unless of course you know otherwise. The injury he sustained on Wednesday could have happened anytime and tackles are more likely to be mis timed in the last twenty minutes when the pitch is heavier and defenders tired.

Right at the top of this thread when I said personally I wouldn't start him! An it wouldn't be like a football club to utilise a player who's not fit would it? The body is more susceptible to "those unrelated" injuries when not fit.

Your original post was more of a should we or shouldn’t we start Ben, and you concluding that personally you wouldn’t start him. It’s then a big leap to ‘Mellon Head getting it wrong again’ and ‘just cannot see why he started’.

We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment.
We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals.
We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards.
If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing
abuse@sportnetwork.net